[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by Cody6.2

Lets be honest the discrepancy in Mustang GT 1/4 performance in all these vs 2016 Camaro tests is ridiculous. The exact same magazines were getting 12.6-12.7 out of the GT in their last comparisons in 2015. So seeing the same issues in something like 0-150mph is no surprise.

The auto and manual GT that C&D tested last year both ran 13.0 @113mph (runs with the "good" 0-150 times). See links above.

Please show me a link to these 12.6-12.7 that C&D ran on a 2015 GT.

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

The auto and manual GT that C&D tested last year both ran 13.0 @113mph (runs with the "good" 0-150 times). See links above.

Please show me a link to these 12.6-12.7 that C&D ran on a 2015 GT.

Heck I would like to see a link to any mag that showed those times.

[ULTRAZLS1]

It hasnt happened.

The private owner hero time for the GT manual is only a 12.5 lol. Which is the same as the 5th gen camaro.

A mag that can pull a 12.8 with it is doing a pretty damn good job. 12.6-7....sure.

The scat pack a8 runs 12.6 in most mag reviews.

The mustang got curb stomped plain and simple.

He will get over it eventually.

[Cody6.2]

Originally Posted by 13vertss/r's

Heck I would like to see a link to any mag that showed those times.

For some reason I thought the Motor Trend 1LE vs Scat Pack vs GT test yielded a 12.7 but I guess it was 12.8 @ 112.2 with a 4.4 0-60 time.

[SS 1LE]

Originally Posted by Cody6.2

... it was 12.8 @ 112.2 with a 4.4 0-60 time.

Which as far as I know are the best times for a new GT.

[Cody6.2]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

It hasnt happened.

The private owner hero time for the GT manual is only a 12.5 lol. Which is the same as the 5th gen camaro.

A mag that can pull a 12.8 with it is doing a pretty damn good job. 12.6-7....sure.

The scat pack a8 runs 12.6 in most mag reviews.

The mustang got curb stomped plain and simple.

He will get over it eventually.

I've owned 35+ GM vehicles and 6 Fords to date so I'm not losing sleep over Gen6 performance.

[huggercamaro21]

Originally Posted by Cody6.2

I've owned 35+ GM vehicles and 6 Fords to date so I'm not losing sleep over Gen6 performance.

Anyone who loses sleep over the performance of a car needs serious help lol. But the 6th Gen Camaro hurts the 6th Gen Mustang's feelings in terms of out of the box performance.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by ron123

Bought the often talked about Car and Driver December issue and see that acceleration times for Camaro SS are amazing vs. Mustang GT:

0 - 150 MPH
Camaro SS = 25.1 seconds
Mustang GT = 29.0 seconds

Mustang is 3.9 seconds slower

3.9 / 25.1 = 15.53 %

The Camaro SS acceleration is 15.53 % faster than the Mustang GT in the zero to 150 MPH time as tested? Small weight advantage plus 6.2 Liter vs 5.0 Liter and HP/Torque advantage looks like it means a lot.

Before Camaro Gen 5 and 6 came along I was a Mustang fan. Ford seems to have sidelined most of their "Ford Performance" division models over recent years.
Ron

C&D's new long term '16 GT ran 0-150 in 25.4. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...rm-test-review

That's identical to the '15 GT they tested. I wonder why the one they tested against the Camaro took 29s? Seems like a lot of variation from test to test, unless the 29s is an outlier.

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

C&D's new long term '16 GT ran 0-150 in 25.4. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...rm-test-review

That's identical to the '15 GT they tested. I wonder why the one they tested against the Camaro took 29s? Seems like a lot of variation from test to test, unless the 29s is an outlier.

I've found that many mags that do a instrument test carry that same number to the next model if there have been no changes to the model. I find it hard to believe they got the exact same time again, and the 16 was almost 40lbs lighter.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by 13vertss/r's

I've found that many mags that do a instrument test carry that same number to the next model if there have been no changes to the model. I find it hard to believe they got the exact same time again, and the 16 was almost 40lbs lighter.

I initially thought the same thing, but the '15 and '16 GTs that ran 0-150 in 25.4 were in fact two different cars tested at different times. Check the "test sheet" link within the link that I posted for both.

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

I initially thought the same thing, but the '15 and '16 GTs that ran 0-150 in 25.4 were in fact two different cars tested at different times. Check the "test sheet" link within the link that I posted for both.

Your right. Looked at both test sheets and the lighter 2016 did a bit worse then the heavier 2015.

[RedFuryZ28]

Originally Posted by Cody6.2

I've owned 35+ GM vehicles and 6 Fords to date so I'm not losing sleep over Gen6 performance.

Always gotta try and act cool and tell everyone about your "35+" vehicles that you've owned.

[Blazin383]

Originally Posted by pdoherty972

Well you know that test showing 25.4 has to be wrong. Why? Because we already know the SS is beating the GT by about .7 second in the quarter (with both cars ending the quarter at 110-116 MPH), not terribly far from 150MPH. So unless one thinks the Mustang gets faster at those speeds, enough to knock more than half a second off the gap developed by the end of a quarter mile there's no way it's within .3 of the SS to 150. That gap will likely grow LARGER after the quarter not smaller; it's just more time for the power differential to take ever more effect (the same differential that handed the GT its butt in the quarter and 0-60).

Ummmm...I have to believe that anyone who thinks 150 mph isn't terribly far from 110-116, hasn't been 150 mph in a car!

[z28guy30]

Originally Posted by SS 1LE

They did? I have never seen a 2015 GT test that was a 12.6 or 12.7? Best I have ever seen in print was 12.8. Please post the link...

Same here. I have never seen a magazine tested Mustang GT run faster than a 12.8-12.9 in the 1/4. I have seen slower times like 13.0 though. Not to insult anyone but I think it is a fact some Mustang owners are a bit delusional.

The 5.0 Mustang is capable of hero times like a 12.4 but so is the 2016 Camaro. I have seen 11.9 and 12.0 times for it, but they are not typical.